Reclaiming the Word Liberal

After a century of tyrannical leftists ranging
from Lenin to Chavez, the idea of an Upper Left political movement
may seem strange, wacky even. But it shouldn’t be. The idea
is not new. It was once mainstream in the English-speaking world.
Members of the Upper Left were once called Liberals. Adam
Smith was a liberal. He advocated free markets and some
assistance to the poor, such as government-provided education.
Smith even advocated an income tax, albeit a flat one. (Given
the highly regressive tax system of his day in Britain, this was a
major move to the Left!) Notice the similarity of the words:
liberty, liberal. Liberal once meant something akin to Libertarian
today, albeit less radical.

So how about a modern Liberal Party for the U.S.?

Well, there might be some branding problems. The word
“liberal” in the U.S. now means something similar to
“social democrat” on the other side of the Atlantic.
Long term, the confusion might be useful, much as what’s left
of the American Independent Party cashes in on people trying to
register themselves as independent of any political party.

But a confusing brand makes it hard to identify the original
core of the party. Without a solid core and branding, a modern
Liberal Party could degenerate into yet another far left party. (If
you want that, join the Justice Party. Now
that’s a great party name – one I’d like to use
if it wasn’t already taken.)

Also, the word “liberal” has picked up some pretty
negative connotations. Even the Left is moving away from it,
preferring “progressive” or even
“socialist.” (Gulags and starvation are groovier than
Michael Dukakis and Walter Mondale, it would seem…)

What we need is a modifier that conjures up more images of Adam
Smith and less Lyndon Johnson.

Classical liberal is the usual term. At least among the
sophisticated, classical liberal does still connote freedom and
free markets, albeit without the extremism of Murray Rothbard. Rush
Limbaugh even had a guest host who called himself a classical
liberal instead of a conservative.

But classical liberal is a backward-pointing brand. This worries
me. But unlike the Constitution as a core brand, classical liberal
is a bit less tainted by slavery. Many classical liberals opposed
slavery early on. It also points to an ideal that was never
fully implemented. Avoid images of Thomas Jefferson and go heavy on
the Adam Smith, and it might work.

But I still prefer a forward-looking brand. Years back in my LP
days, I helped my friend Kevin
RollinsRollins put together and distribute a
libertarian outreach paper aimed at the downtown coffee shop crowd.
The lefty coffee shops that were plentiful in Asheville were
independent small businesses; these people were anti
corporate, not anti business! As we brainstormed a name for
the paper, we came up with The Free Liberal. The paper was
well received by the target audience. Getting libertarian activists
around the country to distribute the paper to their respective
downtown coffee shops proved to be the bottleneck. The publication
downsized to just a web site,
and not even all that active any more.

As a coherent brand, however, the idea could take off. The
market is there. It’s a matter of finding activists
enthusiastic to spread it.

A Free Liberal Party could promote an updated version of
classical liberalism. Yes, it could be a home for moderate
libertarians, but it should also address some modern liberal
concerns: the huge wealth gap, preservation of wild lands, toxins
in the environment, racism, etc. Some of these concerns can be met
with the classical liberal toolkit. If we balance the budget or
even start paying down the national debt, it would put downward
pressure on profit margins. The idea of a citizen’s dividend goes back
to Thomas
Paine. Using a carbon
tax to fund Social SecuritySecurity is definitely in
the spirit of Thomas Paine’s Agarian Justice.

I own the .org version of the domain on the off chance I get the
time to do something with it (and other people are seriously
interested). However, I have growing reservations about the name.
Personally, I am rather conservative in many regards. The active
anti-Christian attitude prevalent among many liberals and
cosmopolitan libertarians disturbs me. Legalize vice? Sure! Mandate
acceptance? Hell no!

And I won’t join a political party that puts a
pro-choice-on-baby-murder plank in its platform. Any party with the
word “liberal” in its name is likely to do so. So I
prefer to investigate other options.

Read the Book

People wanted an ebook version of the Plan here on this site. So I started cleaning
up, reformatting, and adding a huge amount of content. The book is about three
times the length of the free online version -- and easier to read.

CAPITALISM WARNING! Many of the links to Amazon.com are evil affiliate links!
If you click the links and buy the enlightening and delightful products I recommend, I make a small
commission. So click and shop! And buy yourself something expensive like a big screen
television while you are at it. I could
use the dough.